Review: ‘Sherlock’ comes to PBS

The first question I had while watching “Sherlock,” a contemporary-set adaptation of Sherlock Holmes that PBS” ‘Masterpiece Mystery” is debuting Sunday at 9 p.m., is what 21st century pop culture looks like if Holmes has just appeared on the scene.

“Sherlock,” created by “Doctor Who” producer Steven Moffat and actor/writer Mark Gatiss, exists in a world much like our own, where characters watch TV and listen to music, and where a killer can taunt Holmes (here played by Benedict Cumberbatch) by asking if he wants to phone a friend. Yet if Holmes and his methods are brand-new – and the London cops, as well as partner John Watson (Martin Freeman from the British “Office”), all act as if they”ve never seen anyone like him before – then is this a world without Dr. House, Gil Grissom, Temperance Brennan, Patrick Jane and all the other contemporary sleuths who owe a huge debt to Holmes” superhuman powers of observation?

And conversely, given all these Holmes-ian investigators wandering around 21st century television in our world, what would be so special about watching Holmes and Dr. Watson in present day?

The answer: quite a bit, because Holmes remains a great character regardless of his imitators, and because Moffat and Gatiss have figured out how to translate him to today”s London without making it seem like a gimmick.

Sure, Watson keeps a blog instead of a journal and Holmes is a whiz with a cell phone, but those are just concessions to the time. (If Holmes was a Luddite who didn”t know how to text, that would call more attention to the character being out of his native time, frankly.) Ditto changing Holmes” “the game is afoot” catchphrase to “the game is on,” as he would only say “afoot” if he was referencing a 100-year-old version of himself who wasn”t supposed to exist.

The basics are all the same: Holmes is a brilliant, aloof private detective who helps Scotland Yard out on the most bizarre cases, and Watson is his sometimes frustrated, sometimes impressed, always tough partner. And thanks to committed performances from Cumberbatch and Freeman, and clever writing from Moffat and Gatiss, most of it works splendidly.

Sunday”s episode, “A Study in Pink,” is the first of three 90-minute stories of this first “season” (even by British standards, it”s really short). Adapting the first Holmes mystery, “A Study in Scarlet” (another instance of updating the idiom just enough), it”s wisely told from the point of view of Watson. As in the original 19th century stories, he”s just back from a tour of duty in Afghanistan and feeling adrift. He has a limp that the doctors insist is psychosomatic, has no job and needs a roommate to help with the London rents. A med school pal introduces him to the eccentric Holmes, who has a line on a flat at 221B Baker Street he can”t afford on his own, and before Watson entirely realizes what”s happening, they”re living together and he”s helping Holmes prove that a series of suicidal poisonings are actually the work of a clever serial killer. And, more amazingly, he finds himself enjoying life again – working alongside Holmes gives him both the thrill and sense of purpose he last had in the military. And because Freeman is so inherently likable, and because Watson quickly takes a shine to Holmes in spite of all his insufferable tics, we quickly like him, too.

Though Holmes is mostly unchanged from the original Arthur Conan Doyle version, the world he inhabits has, and Moffat and Gatiss wisely don”t run from that. Holmes is weird, and his broad knowledge base, keen powers of observation and fixation on the most bizarre of crimes marks him as someone the cops don”t entirely trust, even as they recognize his usefulness.

“He gets off on it,” one cop tries to warn Watson. “One day, we”ll be standing around a body and Sherlock Holmes will be the one that put it there… He”s a psychopath. Psychopaths get bored.”

Cumberbatch”s thick topcoat and flowing scarf make him look more like a new incarnation of “Doctor Who” than Holmes, and there”s a definitely alien quality to his performance. But it”s never self-conscious or hammy. Holmes simply isn”t like the rest of us. He sees the world in a different way – the writers and director Paul McGuigan show us (ala HBO”s recent Temple Grandin biopic) how their hero thinks in pictures – and carries himself accordingly.

The first and third installments are a bit stronger than the second, as the first deals with the origin of the Holmes/Watson partnership and the third pits Holmes against arch-rival Moriarty, where the middle chapter is a straightforward mystery. (In that way, the mini-season isn”t unlike the many current American dramas that become less interesting the more standalone a particular episode becomes.)

Overall, though, the reinvention is so smart and funny and thrilling that I hope we get another, longer season before too long – and not just because I want to find out what Hugh Laurie is up to in their universe if “House” can”t exist.

(NOTE: As with “Luther,” “Doctor Who,” etc., I’m going to ask that people who have seen all the episodes as they aired in England won’t spoil any specifics for the people who are about to see it for the first time in the States. Not sure yet if I’m going to have time for posts on the three episodes, but I’ll try to at least have an open post up for Sunday’s debut.)

Join The Discussion: Log In With

At the risk of sounding pedantic, 3×90 mins would equate to 9×30 mins, which would actually be longer than a regular British 6×30 season. Here endeth the lesson.

By: Shitegeist

10.22.2010 @ 9:16 PM

Obviously here I’m referring to amount of content, not amount of weeks.

By: sepinwall

10.22.2010 @ 9:40 PM

And that’s all I meant. It’s done PDQ.

By: Matthew

10.25.2010 @ 12:37 AM

wouldnt a drama be 6×60 anyway?

By: PenguinontheTelly

10.22.2010 @ 9:14 PM

I’m so glad you’re reviewing this! As a huge Sherlock Holmes fan, I watched these when they first came out this summer and was floored. Benedict Cumberpatch (as the blogosphere noted, the only man ever to play Sherlock Holmes who possessed an even more ridiculous name) and Martin Freeman are absolutely marvelous, and Moffat and Gatiss write the material with respect for the old and no fear when it comes to the new. I can’t wait until next summer for the next installments!

By: cadfile

10.22.2010 @ 9:18 PM

Saw an extended trailer on PBS the other night and I can’t wait. Victorian England was at the cutting edge of technology then so I don’t see too much problem with Holmes in the 21st century

By: Anonymous

10.22.2010 @ 9:27 PM

A second season has already been commissioned by the BBC: unfortunately, it’ll also be only three episodes, and even more unfortunately, it won’t be on British television until Fall 2011.

By: cv

10.22.2010 @ 9:32 PM

<>

Stuart Little 3? Another series of Jeeves & Wooster?

By: cv

10.22.2010 @ 9:33 PM

lost the bit referring to “what Hugh Laurie was up to” without House. Sigh.

By: Action_Kate

10.23.2010 @ 2:00 AM

what’s Hugh Laurie doing in this universe? well, he’s obviously been tapped to play Holmes in the docu-drama that the BBC is making about this weird but brilliant detective in London. Robert Sean Leonard will attempt a British accent as his friend Dr. Watson. :)

By: Susan

10.22.2010 @ 10:32 PM

“Holmes is weird, and his broad knowledge base, keen powers of observation and fixation on the most bizarre of crimes…”

I never realized Daryl Zero was Sherlock Holmes. Duh, really, but somehow I missed it.

By: Grimmy

10.22.2010 @ 10:39 PM

I thoroughly enjoyed it, one of the best all-round shows that has been produced on British TV in some time, perfectly balancing the humour with the drama.

It is also very well made, with a ton more location shooting than your average production, it is just a shame with budgetary constraints and scheduling (Freeman being Bilbo will surely take him out for a good long while) the show will continue on such a sporadic trajectory for the forseeable future.

Hopefully you’ll be recapping this Alan, would be worth it for your full thoughts on the third ep.

By: Anonymous

10.22.2010 @ 11:05 PM

Thank you very much for bringing this to my attention. My girlfriend reads the Holmes books regularly and may be one of her favorite stories. She also enjoyed the new Doctor Who so I think this will be right up her alley!

By: pmm217

10.22.2010 @ 11:57 PM

They need to clone Steven Moffat so he can write full series of both Doctor Who and Sherlock at the same time. Only 3 episodes of Sherlock a year is criminal. It’s so good, the wait will be agonizing.

By: Maureen

10.23.2010 @ 12:36 AM

This is a show I have been really excited to see. I have been reading such good reviews of it, cannot wait till Sunday night!

By: Tausif Khan

10.23.2010 @ 1:05 AM

1) It is conceivable that those tv characters exist in their world but are not important to the people you mentioned because they are not consumed with television. Holmes is an interesting character because so many minor things about life. Also this is a British-centric show and all of the character’s you listed are American (and in that you forgot Shawn Spencer).

Geology- Practical, but limited. (Tells at a glance different soils from each other. After walks has shown me splashes upon trousers, and told me their color and consistence in what part of London he had received them.)

Chemistry-Profound

Anatomy-Accurate, but unsystematic

Sensational Literature-Immense (He appears to know every detail of every horror perpetrated in the century.)

Plays the violin well.

Is an expert singlestick player, boxer and swordsman.

Has a good practical knowledge of British law

Also “”What the deuce is it to me?” he (Holmes) interrupted impatiently: ” you say that we go round the sun. If we went round the moon it would not make a penny worth o difference to me or my work.””

3) In the book Moriarty was not in Study of Scarlet so this must be another liberty taken by Moffat.

By: Tausif Khan

10.23.2010 @ 1:06 AM

*Holmes is an interesting character because he knows so many minor things about life and spends time cultivating this knowledge.

By: nic919

10.23.2010 @ 5:52 AM

Moriarty is in the third episode, not in Study in Pink, which is the first one.

By: Ovid

10.23.2010 @ 8:26 AM

@nic919: Given that you don’t know that when Watson meets you-know-who in the first ep, that probably counts as a spoiler.

By: Tausif Khan

10.23.2010 @ 6:48 PM

“Sundayâ€™s episode, â€œA Study in Pink,â€ is the first of three 90-minute stories of this first â€œseasonâ€ (even by British standards, itâ€™s really short). Adapting the first Holmes mystery, â€œA Study in Scarletâ€ (another instance of updating the idiom just enough), itâ€™s wisely told from the point of view of Watson.”

I interpreted this to say that the first three half-an-hour episodes were all taken from Study in Scarlet.

By: nic919

10.24.2010 @ 12:59 AM

Alan says in his post that the first episode deals with the Holmes/Watson origin story and the third pits him against Moriarty. That’s an episode description and not a spoiler.

By: Chrissy

10.24.2010 @ 3:35 PM

Maybe I’m missing something, but if Sherlock Holmes doesn’t exist as a character in this world, it stands to reason that the many pieces of entertainment that play on his character wouldn’t exist either. House, certainly. Bones and The Mentalist, maybe, they are a few steps further from Sherlock and might have been created independently. Zero Effect, no chance (and what a shame).

By: kelly

10.23.2010 @ 1:39 AM

All three episodes have already aired in Canada. As a fan of Doyle since I was a kid, I looked forward to this series and I wasn’t disappointed. Great chemistry between the two leads and the writers do not insult our intelligence (much like Doyle himself). Enjoy.

By: Anonymous

10.23.2010 @ 1:45 AM

Sundayâ€™s episode, â€œA Study in Pink,â€ is the first of three 90-minute stories of this first â€œseasonâ€ (even by British standards, itâ€™s really short).

I understand the original (and unaired) 60 minute pilot version of ‘A Study in Pink’ will be an extra on the R1 DVDs. IIRC, the BBC really like what they saw but thought commissioning three 90 minute stories, instead of six or eight hour episodes would work better; Moffat and Mark Gattis agreed, and it’s pretty hard to argue with the results.

By: Derry

10.23.2010 @ 2:29 AM

Actually, if he said “The game is afoot”, he would be quoting Shakespeare. Which is what the original Holmes was doing, I’m sure. It’s only our modern culture that associates the phrase more with Holmes than Henry V. But I’m equally happy with “The game is on”.

By: Ed W

10.23.2010 @ 2:45 PM

It annoys me a little though because I don’t think the phrase, as used by Doyle, meant game as in game you play but game as in a hunter’s game – like a deer. And afoot as in it’s on the loose or on the run, as in we’re wasting time while he’s getting away.

By: belinda

10.23.2010 @ 3:08 AM

I hope this isn’t much of a spoiler (but if it is, please delete it), but I love that they don’t address each other as Holmes and Watson (like the novels), but by their first names (like regular people in this time).

Anyway, I hope lots of people watch it! It is a blast, especially for those who love the novels and for those who love Moffat (and Gatiss).

By: Chris

10.23.2010 @ 4:31 AM

EVERYBODY should watch this! i’ve seen it all, and it’s FANTASTIC!! please watch!

By: nic919

10.23.2010 @ 5:55 AM

As much as I enjoyed RDJ as Holmes in the movie, this BBC adaptation blew him out of the water. Benedict Cumberbatch will probably never be a household name, but he will definitely be the definitive Sherlock after this.

By: KarinCanuck

10.26.2010 @ 4:04 PM

Absolutely 100% agree about RDJ(who I am a big fan of) Cumberbatch (who I had just seen in the film “Stuart: A Life Backwards) was amazing. I have now watched all 3 episodes (which aired here in Canada last month) 4-5 times. One tiny spoiler for next season – following Stephen Fry on Twitter and it seems he is taking on the role of Mycroft. That should make things even more interesting. The wait till next year will be torment!!

By: a

10.23.2010 @ 7:03 AM

You rarely get a Masterpiece Theatre series that goes for more than 3-5 weeks.

By: Anonymous

10.23.2010 @ 7:48 AM

Alan wrote:
then is this a world without Dr. House, Gil Grissom, Temperance Brennan, Patrick Jane and all the other contemporary sleuths who owe a huge debt to Holmesâ€™ superhuman powers of observation?

I reply:
Sorry if this sounds snarky, but could it be that Moffat and Gattis are writing out of a pop cultural frame of reference that doesn’t revolve around America all the time?

By: Amy

10.23.2010 @ 8:47 AM

This series is truly fantastic, I hope a lot of people watch it! It’s such a blast – it elicited more than a couple astonished gasps from me in each episode. Just wonderfully fun, well-done television.

By: Ed W

10.23.2010 @ 10:29 AM

Glad to see this review as I’d been curious. I’m having a hard time getting any enthusiasm to watch this because this version of Sherlock seems very unlike the books that I read years ago. Oddly enough, the RDJ version, while over the top and exaggerated looked closer to the source because Holmes was supposed to have an athletic build and be a former boxer. This guy looks like a wimpy hipster.

But Alan likes it and the latest Dr Who was great…

By: Ace Hansen

10.24.2010 @ 10:00 PM

RDJ looks closer? Not really, book Holmes is described as thin and over six feet. RDJ is…neither.

I’m a Sherlock Holmes fan from way back and I loved this BBC adaptation. It’s overall very well-made, and the acting and cinematography are particularly stellar. London rarely looks so beautiful.

By: skittledog

10.23.2010 @ 11:43 AM

I have never been a Sherlock Holmes fan (or indeed known much about him at all other than catching an occasional half a film on the telly at Christmas or something), and I’m not really someone who enjoys mystery-solving plots. But this had so much positive buzz in the UK when it aired that I had to try it, and I’m really glad I did. I’d say the first episode is probably strongest of all, though that may just be because the joy of this new world and its characters was strongest when first watching it. There are obviously some issues – the middle episode is weak in places, almost all of the mystery plots have some pretty big holes in them and don’t even start thinking about fully realised female characters if you want to enjoy it – but it’s a huge amount of fun and I found myself throwing things at the television when it ended (not to come back for over a year, indeed).

I’m not sure about the comment above re this world not revolving round America, but I’d say there’s definitely a very British feel to the whole thing – perhaps most impressively, London feels like London in all its convoluted, seamy, still-slightly-Dickensian-if-you-find-the-right-corners glory. And so I think a lack of awareness of anything beyond our shores goes hand in hand with that.

By: Jake

10.23.2010 @ 3:56 PM

Once again I am reminded why I follow this blog religiously. I never would have found this show otherwise. Thanks, Alan.

By: J

10.23.2010 @ 5:59 PM

BENEDICT CUMBERBATCH. I don’t think that can be said often enough.

These are a lot of fun, and three 90-minute eps struck me as just enough at the time.

By: Lee926

10.23.2010 @ 10:49 PM

Oh, this is just so disappointing – I just can’t deal with all the buggy things that this website has going on with it. From the ridiculous hoops one must go through to get a comment posted, then whenever I hit “refresh” it goes back to page one and now there is the pop up 15 second ads.

I have been reading Alan since I he began writing about Mad Men and happily followed him to this website but now, I will have to go without.

I don’t understand why the problems with this site can’t be fixed and simplified. Time is too short to spend hassling with all the quirks of this site.

And, thank you for the comments on the new Sherlock – I’m very much looking forward to it as I will watch (at least once) anything to do with the detective who began my decades long love affair with private detectives and mysteries. Well, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, obviously.

Best of luck Alan and everyone! I hope I find Alan again someday in a place where I don’t feel like throwing my computer out the window from frustration.

See ya.

By: Toby O'B

10.24.2010 @ 5:33 PM

Funny that you should mention Hugh Laurie in connection with the update – my first exposure to Benedict Cumberbatch was in the TV series “fortysomething” starring Hugh Laurie as a doctor going through a serio-comic midlife crisis. Cumberbatch played the oldest of his three sons. I’ve been a fan of his ever since.

I just hope the recent news that Martin Freeman has been cast as Bilbo in the two “Hobbit” movies doesn’t interfere with the shooting schedule of the second series of “Sherlock”…..

By: Amy

10.25.2010 @ 1:30 AM

IIRC Sherlock will shoot in January. Mark Gatiss tweeted a few days ago that it won’t conflict: [twitter.com]

Good news!

By: sk

10.25.2010 @ 3:32 PM

Great news that they will shoot in the winter. BC would look less Holmesian without the coat and scarf!

By: Erin

10.25.2010 @ 4:23 PM

Really enjoyed the first episode, but “the game is on” was disappointing — as other commenters have noted, “the game is afoot” is a Shakespeare quote and refers not to a game you play but the game you hunt. Given the 21st-century Holmes’ vast range of knowledge, I’d have found it perfectly believable for him to say “the game is afoot,” referring to the criminal they’re hunting. And doesn’t it sound a lot better than “the game is on”?

Aside from that, it was a very enjoyable episode, and I’m sad to hear there are only 2 more to look forward to — so far, anyway.

By: BPym

10.25.2010 @ 9:07 PM

I loved this show, wasn’t expecting much actually as some of these PBS Mystery series move pretty slowly, but I thought it was a great re-imagination of the Doyle stories – but poignant also in subtly recalling that the original Watson was back from an imperial war when he meets Holmes in Victorian London. How little has changed??

By: Jaynee

10.27.2010 @ 4:04 PM

I loved it.

By: TV Critic

11.29.2010 @ 4:15 AM

A friend knew I am a Holmes enthusiast and showed me the final episode. Frankly, I found it over-produced, like so many modern TV shows. Holmes is no saint in the Doyle cannon, but he’s a completely offensive anti-hero in this incarnation. Watson is on par with the Jeremy Brett versions. The updating with cell phones in each fist, a computer on every desk, and other modern technology will quickly date this series. And there’s nothing more boring than watching someone use a computer. The scenes with Sherlock having a website are not only silly, but inconsistent with the secretive Doyle character. As others have noted, we’ve already seen similar presentations in shows like CSI. I predicted the “twist” of the third episode about 30 minutes into the show. The only thing mildly interesting was the suggestion that the usual asexual portrayal of Holmes (or more likely autosexual) might be gay. For all of its endless ramp edits, I kept looking at my watch hoping we would get on with the mystery soon. Overall, a boring mess that will be forgotten in a decade.

By: Jackey Wordstooln

05.15.2012 @ 9:56 PM

Hi Awesome review! Sherlock Holmes is actually one of my favorite movies of all times and I am really glad that I read your review. Thanks a lot for sharing this article to everybody!